Teint Idole Ultra Wear All Over Full Coverage Concealer 320 Bisque W dupes and alternatives Lancôme
4.6 (10,553)·Light · Warm · golden undertone
Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth and undertone only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar concealer overall, scored on shade match (55%), finish and visual result (25%), wear and performance (15%) and skin suitability (5%).
Overall alternativesShade matchesRanked by the overall match: the most similar concealer on shade, finish, wear and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Ranked by the overall match: the most similar concealer on shade, finish, wear and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Matches: Similar undertone (neutral vs warm)· Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
28
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium fair, warm-neutral undertones
Matches: Similar undertone (neutral vs warm)· Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
28
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium fair, warm-neutral undertones
Matches: Same warm undertone· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
28
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Matches: Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
28
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Same matte finish· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
71
Finish & visual result
85
Wear & performance
75
Skin suitability
28
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: Medium Tan with neutral undertones
Matches: Same warm undertone· Same matte finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly deeper· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish & visual result
85
Wear & performance
49
Skin suitability
28
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry/sensitive skin · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for medium skin with golden undertones
Matches: Same matte finish· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
74
Finish & visual result
82
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
28
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium skin tones with neutral undertones
Matches: Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
71
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
28
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 24-hour wear· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
28
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral undertones
Matches: Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
76
Finish & visual result
50
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Radiant · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed
Matches: Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
69
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
28
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
68
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
28
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
55
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
84
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
65
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
28
Slight colour difference · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Same matte finish· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
61
Finish & visual result
85
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
28
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry/sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: medium skin with a balance of warm & cool undertones
Differences: Slightly lighter · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed
Matches: Same medium coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish & visual result
48
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium tan with olive undertones
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Luminous rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed
Retailer shade note: for medium-tan neutral skin with peach undertones
Matches: Same medium coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
76
Finish & visual result
48
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium with subtle olive undertones
Matches: Same medium coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
74
Finish & visual result
48
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral undertones
$12.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$19.01 less (59%)4.2 (11,365)
Matches: Same warm undertone· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Radiant rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
20
Wear & performance
59
Skin suitability
33
Close colour · Radiant finish
Ingredients (not scored): 23% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Radiant rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry/combination skin
The closest shade to Lancôme Teint Idole Ultra Wear All Over Full Coverage Concealer 320 Bisque W (Light · Warm · golden undertone) in each foundation range, compared on measured colour, depth and undertone. Price never changes the order.
Foundation shade colours are sampled from retailer swatch images, so check the shade on the retailer page before buying.
Why the closest shade match works
IT Cosmetics Bye Bye Under Eye Full Coverage Anti-Aging Water-Resistant Concealer in 14.0 Light Tan, against Lancôme Teint Idole Ultra Wear All Over Full Coverage Concealer in 320 Bisque W. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade320 Bisque WClosest shade match14.0 Light TanHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall85
Colour60%76#dbbc90#e1bc99Close colourColour difference 4.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98LightLightSameDepth difference: 1.0
Retailer descriptionMediumNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Overall match 76/100Shade match 85/100Medium confidence· Digital match
Weights are each part's share of the overall match and each attribute's share of its part; an attribute neither product lists is not comparable and its weight goes to the others in its part. Confidence reflects data quality, not similarity. Price and ingredients are not part of either score.
NARS Soft Matte Complete Concealer in Ginger, against Lancôme Teint Idole Ultra Wear All Over Full Coverage Concealer in 320 Bisque W. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade320 Bisque WClosest overall alternativeGingerHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall84
Colour60%75#dbbc90#ebbf92Close colourColour difference 4.2 (0 is identical)
Depth15%94LightLightSameDepth difference: 3.3
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared56
Longevity30%3524-hour wear12-hour wearDifferent12-hour wear claimed against 24-hour wear
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim not settling into pores or fine lines
Colour stability15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists colour stability (no oxidation)
Comfort15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall28
Skin type100%28Dry, combination, sensitiveNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 81/100Shade match 84/100Medium confidence· Digital match
Weights are each part's share of the overall match and each attribute's share of its part; an attribute neither product lists is not comparable and its weight goes to the others in its part. Confidence reflects data quality, not similarity. Price and ingredients are not part of either score.
30 similar shades scored two ways: the shade match on colour, depth and undertone; the overall match on shade match, finish and visual result, wear and performance and skin suitability. Ingredients are shown for information and used by the filters only. Prices are shown next to every match and never change a score. How scoring and confidence work.
Shade colours are sampled from Beautler’s processing of retailer swatch images and are a digital approximation. Prices and stock were last checked when the product was imported; the retailer page is the source of truth.
SephoraCosts $4 more
